why not remove the shock and put a link there? But depending on the shock rebound and compression it could work just fine. your not talking 1000's of ft/lbs of force here.

 

My Chevy had wheel hop issues after I lowered it, so I moved the shock mounts on the frame. To decrease some of the shock angle, and run a much shorter shock. It worked great!
I was able to remove almost 18 degrees of angle.
It also improved handling as well, stays much flatter in the turns!!!

 

The old Buick GNX cars used a torque arm setup that connected to a cast aluminum dif cover as well.

On the SRT10 Ram, if you look at the front of the leaf springpack, there is also a rubber snubber to help limit axle wrap as well.

peace
Hog

 

If you replace that with a solid link, the rear suspension will likely bind as travels up and down. Then again it might not, but it's difficult to say without measuring everything.

Like PathfinerJr said, its been around awhile and was used on S-10's. It didn't really work that well either. I'm sure it could be made to work, but there are other things that would work better.

Shock relocation like B-runner said with a caltracs is a great place to start given most power levels. Remember, a shock is only about 50% effective at a 45* angle. If you have a 4" drop in the back and no shock extenders, you have a 45* shock angle. Check it out.

 

The torque at the axle is actually pretty high. Flywheel torque X trans ratio X diff ratio - some frictional loss. If that shock is mounted 1' from the center of the axle it could see 4000 lbs or so of force. The leaf springs also see that load.

 

On a side note. Anybody notice the hitch on it. Looks like its there to stay.

 

i would say something like "i got a sawzall for that" but it looks like it might be needed by the frame for strength/support...

 

The SUA configuration of the leaf springs most likely are more of factor than that one twin tube gas shock. A coil over would be a more effective way to control axle wrap in that particular configuration.